WEBVTT - TRENDING- Olivia Rodrigo

0:00:00.160 --> 0:00:02.280
<v Speaker 1>Taylor Swift in Bad Blood. It's why don't two point

0:00:02.320 --> 0:00:04.400
<v Speaker 1>seven kiss up in Los Angeles? Thank you so much

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.880
<v Speaker 1>for having us on Ryan Seacrest with you. Let's get

0:00:07.880 --> 0:00:10.479
<v Speaker 1>to this trending report and then I've got your Jonas

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:14.240
<v Speaker 1>Brothers tickets. But Olivia Rodrigou's album is coming out tomorrow

0:00:14.720 --> 0:00:18.560
<v Speaker 1>and her first track Vampire Big Hit, and I guess

0:00:18.560 --> 0:00:20.119
<v Speaker 1>she is. You know, there have been rumors about it,

0:00:20.160 --> 0:00:21.400
<v Speaker 1>so set it all up, Tanya.

0:00:21.640 --> 0:00:24.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, So there were a lot of rumors that the

0:00:24.760 --> 0:00:30.639
<v Speaker 2>song and lyrics specifically was about Taylor Swift, and Olivia

0:00:30.720 --> 0:00:32.440
<v Speaker 2>was doing an interview with the Guardian and she was

0:00:32.479 --> 0:00:37.159
<v Speaker 2>asked specifically about this this lyric Bloodsucker, dream Crusher, bleeding

0:00:37.240 --> 0:00:42.080
<v Speaker 2>Me Dry like a Vampire, that being about Taylor Swift.

0:00:42.240 --> 0:00:44.720
<v Speaker 2>So the long story short, there was apparently drama between

0:00:44.720 --> 0:00:46.680
<v Speaker 2>the two of them over writing credits on a couple

0:00:46.680 --> 0:00:49.880
<v Speaker 2>of Olivia's songs that sounded a lot like Taylor's song.

0:00:50.040 --> 0:00:52.680
<v Speaker 2>So that's kind of like the backstory there. So this

0:00:52.840 --> 0:00:55.279
<v Speaker 2>was Olivia's response, She said, how do I answer this?

0:00:55.400 --> 0:00:57.240
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I never want to say who any of

0:00:57.280 --> 0:00:59.800
<v Speaker 2>my songs are about. I've never done that before in

0:00:59.840 --> 0:01:02.880
<v Speaker 2>my career and probably won't. I think it's better to

0:01:03.000 --> 0:01:06.880
<v Speaker 2>not pigeonhole a song to being about this one thing.

0:01:07.040 --> 0:01:09.400
<v Speaker 2>And she said she was surprised when she heard all

0:01:09.480 --> 0:01:13.200
<v Speaker 2>the rumors, But to me, this is the perfect answer

0:01:13.480 --> 0:01:17.080
<v Speaker 2>because if there is, if there was a glimmer of

0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:19.039
<v Speaker 2>a lyric or something that was about Taylor, she's not

0:01:19.160 --> 0:01:22.280
<v Speaker 2>lying and she's not telling the truth. She's leaving this

0:01:22.360 --> 0:01:24.720
<v Speaker 2>kind of mystery behind it. And I think it was

0:01:24.760 --> 0:01:26.720
<v Speaker 2>just like the best way to answer the question because

0:01:26.760 --> 0:01:29.360
<v Speaker 2>I feel like people have been these rumors have been

0:01:29.400 --> 0:01:31.440
<v Speaker 2>swirling since the song came out, and so it finally

0:01:31.480 --> 0:01:34.320
<v Speaker 2>feels good that she did address it and kind of

0:01:35.160 --> 0:01:36.119
<v Speaker 2>put a pin in it.

0:01:36.080 --> 0:01:37.720
<v Speaker 1>And said it in the right way. I'm just thinking,

0:01:37.840 --> 0:01:41.160
<v Speaker 1>like when we're asked questions that we are trying to

0:01:41.319 --> 0:01:43.360
<v Speaker 1>have the right answer to, Yeah, I never have the

0:01:43.440 --> 0:01:46.320
<v Speaker 1>right answer to them. Like she actually said, I'm reading

0:01:46.319 --> 0:01:47.960
<v Speaker 1>the quote here, I think it's better not to pigional

0:01:48.200 --> 0:01:51.000
<v Speaker 1>song to be being about one thing. Hm. It's like,

0:01:51.360 --> 0:01:53.000
<v Speaker 1>maybe I don't know if she thought it through beforehand,

0:01:53.040 --> 0:01:54.360
<v Speaker 1>orf she just did on the fly, But that's like

0:01:54.440 --> 0:01:56.120
<v Speaker 1>exactly what you want to say and what you want

0:01:56.120 --> 0:01:56.800
<v Speaker 1>to have in print.

0:01:56.920 --> 0:01:59.000
<v Speaker 2>Well, even like in driver's license, you know, that was

0:01:59.000 --> 0:02:02.120
<v Speaker 2>like her breakouts. Everybody kind of knew what that was about,

0:02:02.160 --> 0:02:05.240
<v Speaker 2>but she never actually said what it was about, you

0:02:05.320 --> 0:02:06.600
<v Speaker 2>know what I mean. And so I think that's kind

0:02:06.600 --> 0:02:06.920
<v Speaker 2>of cool.

0:02:07.120 --> 0:02:10.400
<v Speaker 1>But there are artists, we have met many of them

0:02:10.400 --> 0:02:12.720
<v Speaker 1>and talked to a lot of them who say the same.

0:02:13.000 --> 0:02:15.800
<v Speaker 1>They want you to you think they intentionally try and

0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:18.000
<v Speaker 1>take you down a path that they're taking you down

0:02:18.000 --> 0:02:19.840
<v Speaker 1>and it's not really about that path, which is a

0:02:19.880 --> 0:02:23.360
<v Speaker 1>clever move, or they just wanted to be up to interpretation,

0:02:24.639 --> 0:02:27.400
<v Speaker 1>or they're using metaphors for things that have not happened

0:02:27.440 --> 0:02:29.760
<v Speaker 1>to them but to other people. And I think that

0:02:29.840 --> 0:02:35.000
<v Speaker 1>all that enigmatic atmosphere is what artists like to create.

0:02:35.440 --> 0:02:37.800
<v Speaker 1>Artists want you to experience a song and then have

0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:42.160
<v Speaker 1>it you know, makes sense for your life too. Right, Well,

0:02:42.160 --> 0:02:43.920
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to this stuff, tone, you're satisfied with

0:02:43.919 --> 0:02:45.079
<v Speaker 1>this quote, so we should all be.

0:02:45.320 --> 0:02:47.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I was very satisfied as a fan.

0:02:47.520 --> 0:02:50.280
<v Speaker 1>There you have it Saturday night. I don't know what

0:02:50.320 --> 0:02:52.280
<v Speaker 1>you're doing, but if you're thinking in the future, I

0:02:52.280 --> 0:02:54.400
<v Speaker 1>have Jonas Brothers tickets at Dodger Stadium for it to

0:02:54.480 --> 0:02:55.519
<v Speaker 1>me coming up with kiss,